DEVANAND LAXMANRAO JAMNIK Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard the matter by consent of the learned counsel appearing for the parties.

(2.) The petitioner challenges order, passed by the State of Maharashtra, dated 9.10.2012, thereby holding that the petitioner's case would be covered by Clause 3(d) of the Guidelines issued by the State of Maharashtra dated 11.5.1992 and the petitioner was entitled to be premature release by condoning the period of imprisonment after he completes the imprisonment for a period of 26 years.

(3.) Ms P.D. Rane, learned counsel (appointed) appearing for the petitioner, submits that the respondents have grossly erred in making applicable the guidelines of 1992 to the case of the petitioner. Learned counsel submits that by Government Resolution dated 15.3.2010, the State of Maharashtra has revised the guidelines for premature release of prisoners undergoing life sentences from time to time. Learned counsel further submits that the respondent State has carved out on special category regarding offence relating to crime against the women and minors. Learned counsel further submits that the contention of the State that even under the said guidelines, the petitioner's case to fall under the category 2(c) is concerned, is without substance.